Batesville Store: Another history chapter comes to a close

The Batesville Store had transformed into a popular store, restaurant, and music venue--but all that came to an end last week.

Courtesy the Batesville Store

According to the current owners of the historic Batesville Store on Plank Road, state agents showed up unannounced on Friday, June 10 and gave them "no option except to close."

"Ironically, our success has proven to be our undoing," wrote co-owner Cid Scallet on the store's website. "They told us that it was decided that we do too much business to remain a country store."

The news spread fast across the web over the weekend, casting a heartless state bureaucracy as the villain who had killed a beloved store.

"There was absolutely no warning," says Scallet, who, with his wife Liza, has been operating the store since 2007 (the latest in a string of owners who have kept the store a going concern for more than 100 years). "And the timing was horrific. We suffered ten thousand to twelve thousand dollars in lost revenue. As a result, fifteen people have lost their jobs."

On Sunday, June 12, the Scallets quickly organized a 50 percent off sale on everything in the store (except alcohol) to recoup their losses, a sale they plan to continue throughout the week.

The store's Facebook fans were outraged, launched a Save the Batesville Store group, and Scallet says he received 400 emails expressing sympathy and support. The Newsplex, NBC29, and the Daily Progress all jumped on the story with headlines like "State shuts down Batesville Store" and "Customers fight to keep Batesville Store Open." Loyal customers contacted County officials and wrote letters to Governor Bob McDonnell and Senators Mark Warner and Jim Webb asking them to intervene.

It's been no secret that the Scallets had transformed the sleepy little Batesville Store into a popular restaurant, gathering place, and music venue known for early evening concerts.

Indeed, according to Scallet, he was told by County officials that the Store was a "model" of how to save country stores. There was just one problem: as a "convenience store" under the watch of the state's Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, they were only allowed to have 15 seats. For years now, says Scallet, they've had well over 40.

"They gave us two options," says Scallet, "either reduce the seating or get permitted as a restaurant."

Neither one, says Scallet, is economically feasible.

"If I went back to being a small country store, I'd be broke in a week," he says.

Making many of the necessary changes to bring the old building up to code as a restaurant would be too expensive, says Scallet, plus he claims the building's historic designation prohibits significant alterations.

Scallet admits he and his wife knew about the seating issue, and he says they've had more than 15 seats since opening day.

"Everybody knew we were operating this way," he says, "including many city and county officials, who often sat in those seats."

So had the Agriculture Department been overlooking the violation of the 15-seat limit?

"The agriculture inspector was in here a month ago," declares Scallet. "And he didn't say anything."

So why shut it down now? Local health department officials say they had no choice.

"Someone complained about a food-borne illness after eating at the store," says Jeff McDaniel, local Environmental Health Manager for the Virginia Department of Health. "So we asked the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, who are responsible for inspecting the store, to look into it."

While no major health violations were discovered, Health Department agents visiting on Friday discovered that the store appeared to be operating as a restaurant without a permit.

"So we told them they had to stop operating as a restaurant," says McDaniel. "If they wanted to continue operating as a restaurant, they would have to apply for a permit and operate like every other restaurant in the area."

Agriculture officials, however, tell a different story. Spokesperson Elaine Lidholm says their agent notified the health department when it was noticed that the store was operating with more than 15 seats, and that a "store employee" was told in April that the health department would be informed.

"We informed them that because seating now exceeds 15," says Lidholm, "they would fall under the inspection of the Health Department, not us."

"That's a bald lie," says Scallet. "They never mentioned anything to us about our seating."

However, Lidholm and McDaniel agree on one thing: neither agency "closed" the store down, only informed the owners that they couldn't operate as a restaurant anymore.

"We have no authority to close a convenience store," says McDaniel, noting that in addition to reducing the number of seats, the Scallets were presented with other options including limiting the amount of food and selling pre-packaged or catered foods.

For the Scallets, who appear to have made the store a success by fudging some rules (they even put price tags on some chairs so inspectors wouldn't count them), the edict for a store surviving financially from week to week was essentially a death sentence.

"Cid and Liza Scallet transformed it into a real community meeting place with homemade food, beer and wine by the glass, and live music," writes store fan Geoffrey Henson in an email. "It was spectacularly popular and was the heart of Batesville."

However, there would be no sympathy from the Health Department.

"If they wanted to re-open as a restaurant," McDaniel says, "the Health Department would work with them to make sure they were in compliance with state health codes, just as they do with all restaurant owners."

While Batesville Store fans hope there's a way to keep the iconic country store open, Scallet explains that he's had enough.

"We're just beat up and tired," says Scallet, citing battles he's had with government bureaucracies in the past, and the fact that he and his wife are approaching their 60s. "Even if there was a way to fight this, I doubt we would re-open."

According to property owner Norm Jenkins, who bought the store in 2004 and ran it for a time, an exit clause allows the Scallets to walk away from the lease.

"I was certainly surprised," says Jenkins. "But hopefully we'll find someone who wants to take over the store."

48 comments

Good article, I realize it's later than the DP article but definitely explains more.

Hope the store can re-open much like it is now.

Foe June 14th, 2011 | 3:13pm

What a wimp...you don't complain to the state if you get sick in restaurant...you complain to the restaurant.

These restrictions on small business like this slowly strangle our liberties. Every year the politicians du joir...take their turn at making laws that please their most vocal constituents. And the laws, rules and regulations, just keep piling up, year after year. You would think...that after a while we would have finally thought up every law, rule and regulation possible. It's a suffocating thought; we have so many laws on the books in this country that making even one more is surely going to tighten the noose on our liberties to one degree or another. These people provided a safe and desired service to the community, that's all the government involvement needed. I think the government should get out of the chair counting business.
If the whole town started complaining and all the patrons were from out of town riding in on their motor cycles and raising heck...Turns out its one bad apple, and the patrons ARE the town.

democracy June 14th, 2011 | 3:44pm

Dave McNair writes this about events leading to the closing of the Batesville store"

"Someone complained about a food-borne illness after eating at the store," says Jeff McDaniel, local Environmental Health Manager for the Virginia Department of Health. "So we asked the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, who are responsible for inspecting the store, to look into it."

It's clear from reading comments about the Batesville store's closing on other media websites that there were one or two dissidents in the Batesville area who didn't like the store; one of the disgruntled expressed his displeasure with the political temperament (progressive) that seemed to emanate from discussion at the store.

Could it be that the "complaint" received by the health department was feigned, and was really more about politics and political philosophy than any real illness?

I'm wondering...

Mike June 14th, 2011 | 4:07pm

Someone will buy the land, tear apart the store and reopen it as a trendy restaurant/music hall where the progressives from Charlottesville can congregate. Rapunzel's offers this type of atmosphere but it is pretty far away and the downtown mall is getting over-ridden with hoodies. This seems like a gold mine opportunity.

Biff Diggerance June 14th, 2011 | 6:05pm

You so right Foe, I mean every time you turn around they're doing something to the small businessman. It's like all they're jour di veve comes from oppressing good honest businesspeople. Like that canaboyardee about Formaldehyde being a carsinogen. That's ridiculous, and it's gonna hurt the little guy like those Tea Party Patriots the Koch Brothers.

When we gonna stand up and rally around the people who own the country? Gosh

Logan June 14th, 2011 | 6:17pm

Seems to me that they knew they were breaking the rules (law?) and had already made the decision that they would do it for as long as possible and simply close when they got caught. They were given the opportunity to work within the rules and decided that it didn't make financial sense. That was their decision.

It sounds like the health department and ag department were simply enforcing the rules that are on the books. If they want to run a restaurant then they should have to compete by the same rules as everyone else. I am fine with thinking the rules are wrong, but lets not make this a story of the big bad government coming down on the small mom and pop establishment. If anything, the rules should have been enforced sooner, so that the store/restaurant couldn't grow to the point that it was important to the community.

Drooling Elmo June 14th, 2011 | 7:57pm

Logan:
The Dept of Agriculture and the JR Health Dept knew exactly what was happening, and even encouraged, what was going on at the Batesville Store. Read the article, both held out the Batesville Store as a 'model to save Virginia rural country stores', for G od's sake the Dept of Agriculture brouchure on saving country stores features the Batesville Store.

This comes down to two hateful people in town that were happy to make up stories just to spite their neighbors, not only the Store but all of us who live here in Batesville.

peter June 14th, 2011 | 8:40pm

sounds a little butt hurt for gettin busted, why does it matter if they were sick or not, either way they were in violation of the law yes? people get pulled over for broken tail lights then arrested for a dui, maybe the cops were angry about the obama sticker?

Dirt Worshipper June 14th, 2011 | 9:59pm

Drooling Elmo, do you have a link to that brochure? Inquiring minds want to know!

Dave June 15th, 2011 | 12:56pm

I know for a fact that the head of the health department has attended the buffet and concert evenings that the Batesville store had over the past couple months. I do not know if anything can be done but she should step in. As a loyal customer and fan of the store, she owes it to the owners.

Old Timer June 15th, 2011 | 2:03pm

Mike,

The City of Charlottesville is filled with lots of late night hipsters from the COunty as well. maybe when another sleepy town gets ripped apart by the drinking and noise, people will get the message bout these so called music stores. I haven't been to the Batesville Store in a long time, but I used it as what it was. A Country Store.

PartOfBatesvillesMajority June 15th, 2011 | 2:27pm

Two people making up lies just to get them shut down!! are you serious!. They thought they were above the law!! they wernt helping Batesville they were hurting it. We couldnt drive down the road w/out fear of hitting a car or someone. We couldnt check the mail with out parking in the way of other people! the store was trying to be a restaurant even though they knew they couldnt the people going there were made up of mostly people not even from here! or didn't live close to it. I know this because I live right down the road!!! thank god they are gone now. I don't really care how it happened. He admitted they knew they had to many chairs..but of course he didnt care. Batesvilles residents that have been here for a long time did not like the store and are not sad to see it go most anyway. Nobody is above the law, they could of changed things around and kept it but the chose not to. There fault not the person that got sick and not the goverment, its cid and liza's fault. If you don't think so then your just an idiot!

Drooling Elmo June 15th, 2011 | 2:58pm

dirt worshipper - It's physical not online, but I've got it in my hand, post an email and I will scan for you.

Ghost of the Monacan June 15th, 2011 | 2:59pm

Hey Old Timer -- from the Monacan perspective I used that space as what it was...a good spot for a squat and butt scratch before rambling on to the water you newcomers call the Hardware River.

Caroline June 15th, 2011 | 3:07pm

The thing about laws is they can't be assigned arbitrarily -- and that's a good thing. Let's say that this wonderful, nice store was technically operating as a restaurant (which it WAS) but because it was so "nice" officials looked the other way. That "looking the other way" must therefore apply to all country stores operating as restaurants without permits -- even if they are dirty and run down. That's how the law is supposed to work, folks, otherwise officials can choose arbitrarily whether they enforce things or not based on who YOU are. That's how it's done in countries without equity and freedom, and I don't think that's a road we want to go down. The store owners had some pretty simple options, honestly, which they chose not to take. That is not the state's fault.

Mike P June 15th, 2011 | 3:20pm

If it ain't broke, don't fix it and the Batesville Store was not broke UNTIL government bureaucracy got involved and broke it. With all the problems in the world today, this is what our tax dollars are being spent on. Stupidity.

Mike June 15th, 2011 | 3:28pm

I don't get the outpouring of sympathy for the owners. They want to operate as a restaurant, but don't want to spend the money to get the facility compliant with the local laws. The fact that it's a charming place and they're lovely people is irrelevant. As an earlier poster pointed out, they knew that they were noncompliant from the first, and chose to continue to operate. It sounds to me like they went into this with their eye open and decided to take their chances.

Bottom line: why should they get a pass when everyone else who operates a restaurant has to play by the rules?

bill marshall June 15th, 2011 | 3:29pm

The problem is the zero tolerance and the lack of judgement. The state should have come to an agreement onn the spot to reduce the kitchennoutput, reduce the number of chairs and given them 30 days to apply for some sort of a varianace on the chair issue.

Its too bad the laid off workers will not be able to spend their newly found food stamp money at the store since is closed.

It is the wrong time for the state to willfully put 15 people out of work when there is no imminent danger to society. If the chairs had been piled up in the parking lot he would have been given 30 days to remove them as trash.

Walt June 15th, 2011 | 3:42pm

@Droolin Elmo

Scan and put in on Scribd, please.

Caroline June 15th, 2011 | 4:46pm

"The problem is the zero tolerance and the lack of judgement. The state should have come to an agreement onn the spot to reduce the kitchennoutput, reduce the number of chairs and given them 30 days to apply for some sort of a varianace on the chair issue.

Its too bad the laid off workers will not be able to spend their newly found food stamp money at the store since is closed.

It is the wrong time for the state to willfully put 15 people out of work when there is no imminent danger to society. If the chairs had been piled up in the parking lot he would have been given 30 days to remove them as trash."

Everything you describe is arbitrary, meaning any official can decide "on the spot" how to apply the law. That all sounds nice and fine, but do you want one individual to have that kind of say-so over your business? Yikes. It is clear upon taking a closer look that the owners had notice and knew very well that they were in violation. And, once again, they CHOSE to close up shop. They themselves could have reduced the chairs to 15 on the spot...but they didn't.

easydoesit June 15th, 2011 | 4:54pm

Many of us who have lived in the Batesville area for many years appreciated being able to stop at the store for a bite to eat, some live music and a beer without driving all the way to town, or without driving at all! The speed limit is 25 there and with the post office right there, please do continue to go slow and be aware of pedestrians whether the store is in business or not. What I think is the worst part about this situation is that Cid and Liza were aware of the possibility of this happening, and allowed us all to become accustomed to having this community meeting place without sharing that knowledge with us. They did a great business, and probably made a nice profit overall, and now we are left without a store. I do hope someone is able to re-open it in an allowable and feasible capacity.

Tuck Light June 15th, 2011 | 5:03pm

That comment about the squat and butt-scratch - now that was funny. I don't care who you are - that was funny.

On a more serious note: If we could get all the folks who moved to Central Virginia from California, New York, Illinois, and Northern Virginia - to leave town, this place would be so much nicer. It be an ALL-AMERICAN TOWN like it was back in '76.

A person can dream.

Dave June 15th, 2011 | 5:20pm

The "state" bends over backwards to work with owners who, for what ever reasons, find themselves in this type of situation. The last thing state or local agencies want to do is close businesses and have people put out of work. Sure sounds like the operators just decided they were not going to even attempt to comply and closed. The state did not put these people out of work.

Caroline June 15th, 2011 | 5:26pm

I know this firsthand, Dave, owning two small businesses here. I think this just provided yet another lightning rod for people to grind an anti-government axe. The owners also had the option to seek a waiver from ordinance requirements from the county. Happens all the time.

Frank P June 15th, 2011 | 5:47pm

Well, the law's the law, folks, and if it should be applied uniformly then so be it. But I agree with Mr Marshall in that even if the county was aware of the discrepancy in actual seating versus approved seating and the precipitating factor was presumably a complaint about an order of food purchased there, with the ensuing intrusion of the Health Dept, the end result is an empty building with no revenue generated, and an increase in the unemployed in the area. The old timers (and having lived in this area since 1950 I feel like I qualify) should be smart enough or perceptive enough to appreciate the fact that "the way it used to be" wouldn't come close to cutting it - in Batesville, White Hall, Keene, Cunningham, Earlysville - name another small village that's lost or losing it's economic base when the mood strikes you. The county was happy to grant permission to Harris Teeter to build on 250 just a few miles down the road. Do you really think that the next Batesville store will successfully compete with their wheel of cheese, fishing lures and live bait and hard boiled eggs and beef jerky for sale? Has anyone wondered what it would take to come into "restaurant" compliance - bathrooms-wise - in a community where there's a stream running through the middle? Here's my prediction:The Batesville Store will either: (1) remain closed because any intelligent businessman using his own money will quickly figure out that the conventional revenue stream available to the operator of a "country store" under the purview of the county/state regulators will be hamstrung from the day he opens; (2) go through a succession of operators who will think that they know the way to make it work before they too abandon the idea. Either way, Page's Store ain't coming back.

The problem is the zero tolerance and the lack of judgement. The state should have come to an agreement onn the spot to reduce the kitchennoutput, reduce the number of chairs and given them 30 days to apply for some sort of a varianace on the chair issue.

Its too bad the laid off workers will not be able to spend their newly found food stamp money at the store since is closed.

It is the wrong time for the state to willfully put 15 people out of work when there is no imminent danger to society. If the chairs had been piled up in the parking lot he would have been given 30 days to remove them as trash.

Tim Taylor June 15th, 2011 | 9:40pm

If you think that the government is your friend you are sorely mistaken. Why do you think it takes so long to get a project approved? They are very subjective in their interpretation of the laws and not at all interested in a small busineses need for expediency.

They are however, interested in harrasing Arbys about his signs or local car dealers about ballons.

They also do need to try and consider the big picture when choosing levels of enforcement. There is nothing wrong with a cop seeing someone with an expired inspection sticker 1 block from home telling them he will be driving by in a couple of days to make sure they got it done... especally if it is an old beater of a car with an obviously poor person driving. He can always fine them in a couple of days...

Its called compassion and practicality.

Tracy Carver June 15th, 2011 | 10:15pm

Simple solution here. Cut down the number of chairs to 15. Have high stand up tables to display goods and let the patrons stand around like in the olden days. As far as parking goes, park in the lot by the post office, NOT in front of the building, There is several vacant lots down the road where the church parishoners park that could be used. The people can walk 50 yards to the store for the concerts.

dave June 15th, 2011 | 10:23pm

Tim -
What happens when the cop goes by a few days later and the car has not been inspected and then after warning the person yet again goes by a few more days later and it has still not been inspected. The bottom line is that in all the cases you mentioned the people were just plain stubborn and refused to comply or attempt a resolution. The government is what the people make it - it has been elected by a majority of those few who bother to vote. If people are not happy with the present government they can vote it out next election (especially true at the local level). The operator at the Batesville store was simply getting over because he deemed it too costly to comply.

jebmeister June 16th, 2011 | 4:12pm

This is an outrage... and a cryin' shame.

Old Timer June 16th, 2011 | 4:41pm

Hey Ghost,

LOL. Well, that means you are definitely a ghost. But it WAS a good spot before rambling down to the river. I had a lot of fun up and down plank road with my kids too. There was some butt scratching from time to time.

Old Timer June 16th, 2011 | 4:49pm

PoBM,

"Two people making up lies just to get them shut down!! are you serious!. They thought they were above the law!! they wernt helping Batesville they were hurting it."

Sounds like a familiar story. Its all great for those who are getting the benefit, but for those who are inconvenienced by rules being ignored, its another story. Stand up, and you are the bad guy; You are anti-business. You are an old fogey. You are lazy. You don't like people. You are a whiner.

Ultimately, it all comes down to the business owner understanding their community, and fitting in with that community with what they want to offer, and then doing the legwork. Nobody should be unable to access the PX because of the store. When the rules are finally enforced, we get the scream of 'victim victim' even though they have been victimizing people all along.

democracy June 16th, 2011 | 8:37pm

I continue to be puzzled by Tim Taylor's "logic."

On the one hand, he says (oddly) that a cop might choose to overlook enforcement of state vehicle inspection laws, especially if a vehicle is "an old beater of a car." This is exactly the kind of vehicle that is most likely to be safety-deficient and, therefore, a potential threat to other drivers. (Taylor refers to this as "compassion and practicality)

On the other hand, Taylor says that the county "harassed" the owner of the Forest Lakes Arby's, even though he blatantly violated the county sign ordinance multiple times, in addition to other offenses (the owner lost in court, and he lost his appeal too). Apparently he also ran afoul of his contractual agreement with Arby's .

This is the very same Tim Taylor who said that it was necessary to use a breathalyzer on a student who some other students said may have been drinking at school because "accusations equal reasonable cause." The student who ended up being breathalyzed had not been drinking. Taylor said that "she is a better person for having been on the right side of the humiliation," and "The breathalyzer may have saved her reputation."

Hmmm. Talk about some fuzzy thinking.

This is the same Tim Taylor who dug up a student interrogation case from North Carolina and tried to turn it into a search and seizure case. I called the case that Taylor cited a "a convoluted twist of logic" because in the North Carolina case a student was pulled from class and placed in a conference room, questioned by police, not informed of his rights, and not told that he could leave the room if he wanted. The North Carolina Supreme Court (in a 4-3 decision) said the student was never really in custody.

The North Carolina case cited by Taylor was decided today by the Supreme Court (5-4), in favor of the student. The Court said, in part, ""To hold, as the state requests, that a child's age is never relevant to whether a suspect has been taken into custody — and thus to ignore the very real differences between children and adults — would be to deny children the full scope of the procedural safeguards that Miranda guarantees to adults."

Heard from 2 reliable friends today that the HD has contacted the Scallets and they are going to meet with them next week, with the goal of reopening Batesville Store.

I really don't get the antipathy towards the Scallets by some commenters.

@Old Timer: How were they "victimizing people"?
@Caroline: You must own 2 very simple businesses if you've had no issues with county regs, I'm curious if either involve HD inspection?
@Dave: The state "bends over backwards"? You've got to be kidding me.

Biff June 16th, 2011 | 9:27pm

"On a more serious note: If we could get all the folks who moved to Central Virginia from California, New York, Illinois, and Northern Virginia - to leave town, this place would be so much nicer. It be an ALL-AMERICAN TOWN like it was back in '76.

A person can dream."

@Tuck: Don't forget New Jersey. I have that dream all the time too, when UVA wasn't in session Cville was a ghost town...... and sooo much fun. Really do miss those days, but they're not coming back

democracy June 17th, 2011 | 7:17am

And interestingly, both the health department and the department of agriculture and consumer services are telling different stories about what happened, and how.

Apparently, requests under the state freedom of information act have been made for the complaint, and for documents related to it.

I'd be willing to bet that there will be a follow-up story in The Hook.

Old Timer June 17th, 2011 | 10:38am

Biff,

I would like to know why you choose to mischaracterize what I said as antipathy. In fact, I find the attitude towards those who complained as being a bit closer to the mark.

My point was really simple. If you knowingly break the rules, people suffer because you break the rules, and you get called on breaking those rules, you aren't a victim. You aren't being picked on. You made a conscious choice. And yes, the people who suffer the consequences of your decision to break the rules, are victims of your decision. That might not be your intention, but it is the result just the same.

Its very clear from the article that the owners knew exactly what they were doing, and had every intention of at best circumnavigating the rules. Some people got sick, people were denied access to their private property - mail - and people were placed at extreme risk - the road being filled with pedestrians. Visibility in that area is not good.

There are rules about different business models for very good reason. As a now retired business owner, I find the Scallets methods very tiresome. Sad too, because its clear they have a lot of options to make money and provide a desired product, without the negative impact.

Biff Diggerance June 17th, 2011 | 11:58am

This event has been such a lightning rod, and the reactions are so interesting; they boil down to:

--Big government gonna get us all Tea-Party rants (that besides the usual Kaczynski paranoia and slippery slope logic, overlook the fact that this an action by state authorities under a Republican governor).

--Oh life was so sweet back then before all them came (how many Virginians does it take to change a lightbulb?)

--They knew the rules and chose not to play by them (but was there a "wink" on file?)

--Cut the well-intentioned people some slack and work for solution that suits state, proprietors, and community new and old.

OK the Monacans don't make out so well in any scenario because they were pushed out and are extinct. But they remind us that no one gets dibs on "I was here first). Hopefully the rest of us can probably figure out the last one, right? Not just Pages Store but the other stuff too.

Biff June 17th, 2011 | 1:01pm

Just recieved this by email from Cid:

Dear Friends,
Liza and I have been overwhelmed and deeply touched by the torrent of support and consternation that the closing of The Batesville Store has provoked in the community. I have received almost five hundred emails in response to last Friday's incident, and we have been hearing about the waves of protest and concern that have been directed toward state and county officials and politicians.

Who would ever have thunk it?!! A humble country store in the middle of Wheretheheckarewenowsville that had some pretty doggone good homemade food and some darn fine live music seems to have generated enormous loyalty--and true sadness about its closing. It goes to show that while other places might mouth sweet sentiments about the importance of their so-called "community," Batesville and its environs truly are a wonderful and caring community.

What Liza and I would love to do to thank you for your support is to give you a famous Scallet chocolate chip cookie or a brownie or a scoop of homemade ice cream.We can't do that in reality, but then again, has our store ever been quite real? So let's all pretend that we are sitting down together one last time on our excess seating and are having a big sweets party . . . with Eli Cook or The Pollocks or Rick Olivarez or Bobby Read or Willie D-E or Brad Bryant or Bluzonia or Jim Wray or Hod O'Brien or Billy Caldwell or Lulu and the Virginia Creepers or Sarah White playing in the Wine Cellar.

Ain't that a fun fantasy?

Many of you have asked us what we plan to do next. The short answer is that we don't have a clue. We are still recovering from last Friday's ambush and its immediate consequences. We need some time to recover our bearings and consider our options. Whatever we decide to do, I promise that y'all will be the first to know.

In the meantime, we had considered opening the store tomorrow--Saturday, June 18--to continue our big blowout sale, but we have so little left to sell that we've decided to stay closed tomorrow after all.

Thanks ever so much for the amazing support you've offered over the past week and everything you've done over the past four-plus years to make The Batesville Store the finest commercial establishment in the area.

Caroline June 17th, 2011 | 2:16pm

"@Caroline: You must own 2 very simple businesses if you've had no issues with county regs, I'm curious if either involve HD inspection?" ~ Biff

Huh? When did i say I've had "no issues with county regs." Helps to read accurately and put things in context, Biff. Check the post prior to mine to which I was replying, which said that the "last thing the state wants to do is shut businesses down and put people out of work." I was agreeing with this statement. And I don't know if you would call my businesses "simple" or not -- one is consulting to Pacific Rim governments (try navigating THOSE waters) and the other is provision of short-term business management teams here in VA. So no, they don't require health department inspection.

But that's not the real issue here, Biff. If I were serving food at a volume that made me a restaurant I would get the inspection. The owners here decided VOLUNTARILY not to have that done. Now, if you have issues with whether restaurants should be inspected, that's cool. You can certainly challenge those through the proper means. But as of now that's what's on the state's books.

Old Timer June 17th, 2011 | 3:14pm

Biff,

As expected, trying to make the State look like the bad guys here. I didn't think Batesville had a population of 500.

Maybe you can give us the names and addresses of all those folks...

Drooling Elmo June 21st, 2011 | 1:45pm

What is scribd?

Old Timer - quite a nasty one aren't you? The Scallets got an email from us, we live in
Batesville, they also got an email from my daughter in college and her friend from school who comes to visit us when she can't return to the UK over breaks. They also got emails from North Carolina, Georgia, Maryland, Illinois and Massachusetts, all from people who have stayed with us over Memorial Day, Labor Day or Thanksgiving and visited the store. They also got an email from a musician friend of ours who travels the country and has no address that I can provide you.

There are not 500 people here in Bateville, but they touched the hearts of many from far away. I am appalled at the vitriol all over the web from a few filled with hate when there was nothing but love at the store. I may be an old hippie but some of you commenting here su k. I just hope you don't live in Batesville.

Not at all. And not saying anything different than a lot of other folks on this thread. I am just worn out on attitude that because something is cool to some people, that the rules shouldn't be applied, or enforced, and everyone else should be inconvenienced by it. It is irrelevant if people from out of Virginia like it. What is relevant is that there are zoning rules, and for health and safety reasons, they need to be enforced.

I am even more worn out on folks like you who want to label folks like me as nasty because we don't share you feelings about equal treatment under the eyes of law.

Old Timer June 21st, 2011 | 4:24pm

Who the heck is speaking for me? Are they speaking for me?

zack June 22nd, 2011 | 1:41pm

Umm, He knew it was illegal. The dep't looked the other way for a long time. He even had price tags on chairs to skirt chair restrictions. It was gonna end eventually. He could be a restaurant or a convenience store or a hybrid or lose the tax benefits. Save me the drama. They took the $$ and ran it seems.

Biff June 30th, 2011 | 7:21am

Dear Old Timer,
You wrote:
I would like to know why you choose to mischaracterize what I said as antipathy. In fact, I find the attitude towards those who complained as being a bit closer to the mark.

I read what you wrote and used the word "antipathy" to characterize the feelings I detected as I tried to understand what some commenters wrote, didn't single you out Old Timer, believe I referred to "some commenters". How is that a "MIScharacterization".

Antipathy is simply the opposite of empathy, which as a fellow small business owner I have in spades for the Scallets in their difficulties dealing with the various state and local agencies. Do you approve of the Ag dept / Albemarle County Health Dept bait and switch game? I find it the worst sort of random government action. Businesses need clear guidelines with which to work, and cooperative agents to work with. After 4 years of successfully building their business under the eye of the state Ag Dept, the Health Dept stepped in and changed the rules, forcing them to shut down.
How do you defend that as a reasonable government action?

I also asked you a question that you failed to answer, so I'll ask again: How were they "victimizing people"?

Look forward to your reply, Biff

Biff June 30th, 2011 | 7:46am

@zack: you wrote:
"Umm, He knew it was illegal. The dep't looked the other way for a long time. He even had price tags on chairs to skirt chair restrictions. It was gonna end eventually. He could be a restaurant or a convenience store or a hybrid or lose the tax benefits. Save me the drama. They took the $$ and ran it seems."

I can only assume from what you've written here (including what I take to be your sarcastic "Umm") that you have never run a small business that required dealing with any Albemarle County government agency. I figure you're pretty young and inexperienced, and generally see things in terms of black and white instead of the thousand shades of gray that actually constitute the reality of a businessman's life.

Have you ever heard of the expression "the spirit of the law"? There are conflicts and questions about the best of laws, hence the need for LAWyers. The draconian actions of the Albemarle County Health Dept in this case were not a wise application of laws intended to revitalize dying country stores. If you were familiar with the back story about the debate and passing of those laws you'd realize that their intent was to support people like the Scallets who invested considerable time and treasure in an enterprise that found considerable community support, provided valuable services, and was helping preserve a historical community treasure.

"He could be a restaurant or a convenience store or a hybrid or lose the tax benefits."

What a ridiculous oversimplification of the realies involved here.

"Save me the drama."

Please spare us having to read your silly drivel, and don't reply further.

"They took the $$ and ran it seems."

I find this last remark comtemptible and petty. Who do you think you are to say such a thing. I'd call you a name, but Waldo would delete this whole post, so I'll leave that to another time.

Please don't reply unless you're willing to address the reality of the situation, or at least state your case reasonably. And skip the sarcasm, it's unbecoming.